About your Search

20130416
20130424
STATION
MSNBCW 4
CSPAN 3
LANGUAGE
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
it as enemy combatant, military court. i know john mccain, lindsey graham, couple of others are pushing for that. you need a little more evidence to know whether you can do that. you really have to know, did he become part of the terrorist war against the united states? these e-mails and texts that they're discovering kind of make a pretty good case that he was part of a group that's at war against the united states. if you can make that case, then you could try him in a military court. you could try him in guantanamo bay and not have the spectacle of this trial having to take place in boston or some other place where they would change venue. >> are you sure about military court? as i understand, it was for noncitizens and for foreign nationals. >> if a citizen becomes part of the war effort against the united states -- let's take an example like this. let's take the second world war. let's say an american citizen went to germany and joined the nazi army and invaded the united states, we could try that person in a military court. now, the nature of this war is so ambiguous, you're going
to change. >> lindsey graham is doing a whole bunch of talk radio this morning. it's clear to me, we know why they probably booked all these interviews. because they're worried that this is where the immigration issue could percolate where all of the sudden the connection to boston happens. >> i think it also shows that compared to the last time around in '06 and '07 the republicans who were for this type of legislation are a lot more active in trying to engage with the conservative critics. >> dan, that does seem to be a huge difference before, they would lament maybe to you in interviews. but they wouldn't actively try to fix this. >> yeah. you know, they're pushing forward in a way they weren't before. they're much more confident about the reasons why they're doing this. and they're -- they feel much less defensive about it when they're being criticized by their own people. >> at the press conference amongst the most eloquent were marco rubio. the marco rubio. >> you were there. richard. this was the most fascinating -- >> it's a definition of kumbaya. >> it got those many votes. stick
bell lindsey graham, why isn't he being treated as an enemy combatant? that one to me -- >> what about benghazi? >> shut up. >> stephanie: i'll always have benghazi. it is my terror. no. >> i would never go thirsty again. i'll have another mint julep thank you. >> stephanie: the legal expert i heard this weekend said this is a nonstarter to treat him as enemy combatants. did he a crime on u.s. soil. >> peter king said this. >> i believe -- should be portrayed as enemy combatants. senator mccain, senator graham, senator ayotte, there are so many questions unanswered so many potential links to terrorism here. the battlefield is now in the united states. i believe he is an enemy combatant. ultimately, he will be tried in a civilian court and the statements taken from him cannot be used against him in that trial. right now, the only links we have as much as chechnyan involvement in the islamic movement. are there other conspirators out there? where do they get the radicalization? >> he sounds like pam gellar. might as well grow some gigantic boobs. >> stephanie: run-on sentence please, for
like rubio, on somebody like lindsey graham up for re-election. on somebody even like john mccain and jeff blake. so it's not impossible for this to occur, but it got a whole lot more difficult. >> joy, here's how the "national review" captured rubio's visit there. "it was striking to see how much he is personally admired by the colorful conservative pundits who broadcast on local a.m. stations, and by the biggest syndicated names like limbaugh. they still believe, without a doubt, that he's a top contender for the republican presidential nomination in 2016 and they love that he's already a national force. but when it comes to immigration, they're not buying it." >> yeah. >> why? >> well, because, you know, at the end of the day the o's at the end of rubio's first and last names are quite valuable to the republican party as an avatar for bringing in more hispanic voters. the ideas he's saying are not useful. it's been kind of pathetic to see marco rubio, supposedly this towering figure, latino ronald reagan of the republican party going hat in hand to radio hosts, begging them
: the gang of eight spoke yesterday on capitol hill. four republicans and four democrats. lindsey graham of south carolina addressed concerns that he has heard from his peers about the pathway to citizenship. [video clip] >> learn the language, as a civics exams, pay a fine, work, pass a criminal background check, half of my family would be excluded. this is no easy task. [laughter] i'm glad we are not applying it to ourselves. i knowe is that america is ready for immigration reform. you look at all the polls. if the congress ready to do something that we should have done a long time ago? i really believe we are. if you think the border can be better secured, we have an idea for you to consider. if if you think there is a shortage of illegal labor in the current system works too hard to access, we have an idea for you to consider. if you are a union member or just an average american word about losing your job with cheap labor coming into your country, we have an idea to prevent that. if you are in the shadows and you are worried about what's going to happen to you, we have a solution. y
important to people in my state. i think lindsey graham named it well when he called the schumer- mccain. the leadership of those two gentlemen in this process has been outstanding. it was everything i wished i could see since i have been here. when this bill is passed, it it will be a reaffirmation of two incredibly american ideas. the idea we are committed to the rule of law and the idea that we are a nation of immigrants. i would argue that it is those two ideas working together that decade after decade has enabled every generation of americans to invent the future. it is our time in the 21st century to decide whether we are still up to that task, whether we can continue to invent the future not just here, but the entire world. s of tential ourselves to thesei part of moving us forward. i want to thank the people in colorado who told me on how broken immigration system is effect in their lives and their works. the cattle ranchers on the eastern point. the people working in the high- tech field. the people who are the dreamers when i was superintendent of the denver public schools. eac
spoke yesterday on capitol hill. fourrepublicans and democrats. lindsey graham of south carolina addressed concerns that he has heard from his peers about the pathway to citizenship. [video clip] >> learn the language, as a civics exams, pay a fine, work, pass a criminal background check, half of my family would be excluded. this is no easy task. [laughter] i'm glad we are not applying it to ourselves. knowope is that america i is ready for immigration reform. you look at all the polls. if the congress ready to do something that we should have done a long time ago? i really believe we are. if you think the border can be better secured, we have an idea for you to consider. if if you think there is a shortage of illegal labor in the current system works too hard to access, we have an idea for you to consider. if you are a union member or just an average american word about losing your job with cheap labor coming into your country, we have an idea to prevent that. if you are in the shadows and you are worried about what's going to happen to you, we have a solution. you are going to
senator lindsey graham, specifically from senator john mccain for the suspect to be treated as an enemy combatant. how is legal action at this point most likely to move forward? >> reporter: well, the obama administration would never go for that, partly as a policy matter. they have made it quite clear that civilian courts are up to the task and they think in many ways better than military tribunals which are untested. civilian courts have convicted lots of terrorism defendants. it will be a federal case. they'll charge him withes with use of a weapons of mass destruction. the maximum penalty is the death penalty. the government will have to decide whether to seek that or not. there's an additional wrinkle here. he is an american citizen. he was a naturalized citizen last year oddly on 9/11 of last year, and there is an open legal question about whether even if the government wanted to, it could declare an american citizen captured on u.s. soil as an enemy combatant. it's an untested question. the government tried to do it in the case of jose padilla several years ago and as that case w
got in terms of a note that was handed to me talking about a few senators, lindsey graham, john mccain, kelly ayotte, congressman peter king, all of whom have said this suspect based on his actions clearly is a good candidate for enemy combatant status. we do not want this suspect to remain silent. talk about that in terms of what prosecutors are doing right now. is that the path down which prosecutors and any investigators are going right now? >> well, it's unclear whether or not they're going down that path to identify and designate him as an enemy combatant but they should at least go down the path to determine whether or not that is the designation they should make for this particular person. then they should do it based on our national security, national interest to determine whether or not identifying him as an enemy combatant will actually enhance our national security and national interest. >> what about the charges? what do you expect them to be against dzhokhar. >> well, if he's not designated as an enemy combat eant he wille charged federally. the first decision has to b
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9